Brigby and Cthulu - when we will get feedback?

WelcomeDeath

Crnch73 wrote:

in my opinion, until they fix MMR, then I don't see how they can push rewards back. Even if pushing them back makes sense from a hierarchy standpoint, the MMR can destroy this. For instance, I have maybe hit 900 in 6 total PVP events in my 2 years of playing this game. However, around 600 points or so, I start seeing teams (90% of the time) with 2 champed and boosted 4's, plus a very high featured character. Example: the red shift PVP. At 600-650 points, I could barely find any matches that didn't feature the following team... Switch boosted to near 400, Teen Jean and the Thing both boosted to about 380. I don't think I could beat that team, but that's the only team I was able to find. Also, I got hit by a few teams with boosted Switch, champed boosted Jean, and OML at around 370.

Luckily, the 900 point reward was agent venom, who isn't worth the hassle. And the way the vaulting has been going, I get a lot of his covers from LT's anyways. But overall, I didn't stand a chance thanks to MMR. Until they fix it (read: I don't want it to be easier, I just want it to be more fair and appropriate to rosters) then pushing the rewards back will feel like a punishment.

What's broken about MMR? The way it works is that you can only q rosters similar in strength to yours until you reach a point where teams like that no longer exist. Before the change to progression that caused most 3* players to stop at 575, they were able to climb off of one another up to about 900 (even in s2, which had no cupcakes!)

The MMR is exactly the same in shield sim, but you can likely get to 2k there, so whats the difference? Well, 2 things. First off, the points you gain vs the points the other person loses starts off at a really small ratio, gradually climbing to a 1:1 ratio at exactly 1k in normal events, 2k for shield sim. So the rules would seem to indicate that if 2k in sim is achievable, then 1k in a regular event should be just as easily done...but it isnt anymore. The reason is they put something at 575 (10cp) which took a lot less effort and time than getting to 1k. So players that had been pushing...stopped early instead. This dries up points for that tier. This makes it considerably harder to find points of value in that tier...which causes more to stop. And now, we are where we are today. There are still some who do get there with effort, but most end up being like the little engine that said "**** it." You know: "I think I can, I think I can, I think I can....you know what? **** it, this is too hard."

If adding this reward caused points to dry up because there is too much reward for too little effort, removing it should have the opposite effect in the long run, and make progression rewards, you know, progressive. Get to level x, that helps you improve so you can get to level y. Not get to the higher level reward so you can eventually get the lower level reward. Maybe thats what bothers me, I had to put in extra effort the whole way, going from being able to get to 300, then 400, 500 ,700, 900, up until I hit the point where I could et to 1.3k for the cp. Not getting 4* so i could eventually get to the 3* cover, and hamstringing the rest of the tier to do so.

Crowl

Fightmastermpq wrote:

Holy tinykitty, no. The point is that you have to work hard to get what you want. What you want is CP, it's the best reward, and they don't give it away lightly - you have to work for it. That's it. Everyone wants CP, no one wants to play for it. They want it handed to them on a silver platter for participating.

Firstly, D3 set the level they considered appropriate for the first CP reward in pvp, so it isn't unreasonable to think that they consider the level of "work" required to get to that point is sufficient and is not being handed out to people on a silver platter at all.

Crowl

Welcome Death wrote:

The MMR is exactly the same in shield sim, but you can likely get to 2k there, so whats the difference? Well, 2 things. First off, the points you gain vs the points the other person loses starts off at a really small ratio, gradually climbing to a 1:1 ratio at exactly 1k in normal events, 2k for shield sim. So the rules would seem to indicate that if 2k in sim is achievable, then 1k in a regular event should be just as easily done...but it isnt anymore. The reason is they put something at 575 (10cp) which took a lot less effort and time than getting to 1k. So players that had been pushing...stopped early instead. This dries up points for that tier. This makes it considerably harder to find points of value in that tier...which causes more to stop.

I think you are overlooking the biggest difference between climbing in the sim and in a regular pvp, you have vastly more time to do the sim, so the impact of getting hit drastically reduces too and so people keep going in it.

As far as your supposition that more players are stopping earlier due to the cp reward, it seems just as likely to be the case that attrition has resulted in there being less people playing beyond that point and the vast majority of people stopping at 575 are actually people who only used to play to 300 or 400 instead.

Killians8

The solution isn't raising the 10 CP award higher. If that happened I wouldn't even work to get there as it would no longer be worth the effort for that reward. Getting to 575 is already a bit of a struggle so I certainly wouldn't scrape my way higher for already seem like a reasonable place for it.

The solution is to put something also valuable at a higher level to encourage further climbing. An event token, 50 HP, and finally the 3* cover isn't pushing me to keep moving given the pounding my teams will take trying to get there. The next most valuable trinket on the list is too high to achieve for my roster without wasting HP on shields that I can't afford because I still need them for roster slots.

I accept my roster isn't ready to climb higher without major opposition yet, so I don't expect to get much higher until later. That 10CP will actually help me get to the stage of being able to climb. Removing it will double the current problem.

WelcomeDeath

Just curious....did anyone even like the idea of putting in a token for vaulted 3* store and a separate one for vaulted 4s?

Put it wherever, im just saying a logical progression is: 3* token, specific 3*, cp, 4* token, specific 4*, cp. Compromise on putting the cp before the 4* cover, since it is only half of one. And I really think adding something at 1050 would be a fantastic bridge gap between 900 and 1200. Or even something at 1k and 1100, whatever. People are so caught up being angry, was the suggestion even liked?

The reason I say this is this...theres a vault right now for Howard. It "includes" a vaulted 4* and some vaulted 3*. Its 19,000 hp to empty and get your 3 each 4* covers. It technically fits the description given. Would people rather something like that? Genuinely curious.

Dormammu

Welcome Death wrote:

...theres a vault right now for Howard. It "includes" a vaulted 4* and some vaulted 3*. Its 19,000 hp to empty and get your 3 each 4* covers. It technically fits the description given. Would people rather something like that? Genuinely curious.

The 20 object vaults for 3600 HP offer one 4-star cover (like the one currently offering War Machine). How many should you get for 19,000 HP? Three 4-stars and an LT seems in-line pricing wise.

Well, they may be gouging us, but at least they're consistent!

WelcomeDeath

I dont necessarily have an issue with the store as it is, but not as something to combat half of one tier and 75% of another being removed from regular tokens and progression outside of every 40th event

Alsmir

Welcome Death wrote:

Crnch73 wrote:

in my opinion, until they fix MMR, then I don't see how they can push rewards back. Even if pushing them back makes sense from a hierarchy standpoint, the MMR can destroy this. For instance, I have maybe hit 900 in 6 total PVP events in my 2 years of playing this game. However, around 600 points or so, I start seeing teams (90% of the time) with 2 champed and boosted 4's, plus a very high featured character. Example: the red shift PVP. At 600-650 points, I could barely find any matches that didn't feature the following team... Switch boosted to near 400, Teen Jean and the Thing both boosted to about 380. I don't think I could beat that team, but that's the only team I was able to find. Also, I got hit by a few teams with boosted Switch, champed boosted Jean, and OML at around 370.

Luckily, the 900 point reward was agent venom, who isn't worth the hassle. And the way the vaulting has been going, I get a lot of his covers from LT's anyways. But overall, I didn't stand a chance thanks to MMR. Until they fix it (read: I don't want it to be easier, I just want it to be more fair and appropriate to rosters) then pushing the rewards back will feel like a punishment.

What's broken about MMR?

Let me explain.

The perfect scenario is:
People with similar rosters competing against each other for fair prizes (both progression and placement). 1* rosters vs 1* rosters fighting to get some HP, ISO, 2* covers, maybe 3* cover for first place.
That's how it should work.

What we have is an atrocity. Everyone thrown into one pit, fighting each other. SCLs don't really help because CL8 ranges from 3* rosters to 5* mega-whales. I've seen full 4* rosters occupying first spots in as low as CL4. 2* roster is a cannon fodder for someone with 3*, similarly 4* destroy 3*. I'm mostly sitting in CL7, where I usually get some free points from 2* rosters then I can climb to 650 if I time it right. Adterwards I can either shield or every 4* roster will club me to death, while I'm dropping to 200-300 points. Top 10 placement is out of my reach completely, these 4* covers that could improve my roster are going to 5* and fully leveled 4* players that hardly even notice that reward. That one 10cp reward is the only usefull thing that I can get. At this point getting 3* covers barelly gives me anything. 900-point cover is out of my reach as well.
The only way to fight for top placement is abusing the system and dropping into noob bracket, but not everyone knows that. How the hell are you supposed to convince a new player to do some PvP?
"Uh, you can play PvP, but forget about higher progresiion rewards. Oh, and forget about placement. It's only for people who have been playing for 2-3 years. You'll probably never catch up to them."

Crnch73

Welcome Death wrote:

What's broken about MMR? The way it works is that you can only q rosters similar in strength to yours until you reach a point where teams like that no longer exist. Before the change to progression that caused most 3* players to stop at 575, they were able to climb off of one another up to about 900 (even in s2, which had no cupcakes!)

in theory I believe you are correct, and I understand that if fewer people climb past 575 then the only teams worth points are the harder teams. However, that is not what I have been experiencing for a few months now. As I have said in the past, if this is unique to me, then label me a whiny baby. I could just be experiencing something that isn't normal, in which case I stand to be corrected. however... for all of 2017 I have been attacked by teams way above my pay grade. Excluding the week of PVP bugs near Valentine's Day, I still have a hard time finding teams that are similar to my roster. I have 9 champed 4's, most times I only have one boosted. I see teams with the featured character + 2 champed 3's. Sometimes those 3's are boosted, sometimes not. Then when those disappear, I start finding teams with 2 boosted champ 4's (near level 370) and the featured character boosted very high as well (near 400 or so). Then while I skip lots of those teams, I get hit by a team with the featured char at level 400, a champed 5, and a boosted champ 4.

So, as you said, with fewer people climbing because the fruit is hanging low, I run out of viable teams to hit. But the teams that want to hit me are monstrous compared to mine. Somehow in all the mixups going on, my MMR went basically from "you will find only teams of 3*s... then you will find teams of only boosted 4*s... then champed 5* teams will find you". The only way to climb for me is to spend lots of money on shields. From my perspective, this is all growing pains. But as someone firmly in 4* land, making legit progress is tough for me. The people who need the 4* reward the most struggle to get there, the people that need it least have no problem. It's the law of the jungle, sure... but I just don't believe making a prize even harder to get will solve this. If we want to move the prizes around, we need to make them accessible still, that is my opinion. From my perspective, moving any of the current prizes further away... you might as well be pay-walling them from me.

smkspy

It's just more frustration than anything that keeps me from hitting 900. I don't mind getting hit, but the barrier past 800 is too much. Only so many times that I will middle around 830 get hit back down to 700ish and try to climb again before I either give up altogether or shield for whatever placement I can get.

Magic

But the reality is taking away the CP will not help it. On the contrary. It will slow down your progress and would create even bigger gap between players like you guys (with limited number of championed 4*) and the ones with many 4* and even 5* leveled/championed. A random token in that place would do nothing.

What needs to be done is the rewards need to be improved. More tokens, more CP, more ISO on the way to 1200 where another 4* cover sits (or CP/LT but devs might think it's too much if they will add more CP on the way). Say you keep the CP at 25 per event but they are at 575 (10) and 1000 (15). I am a 900-and-done player but I used to be able to get to 1k before the change. I might do it again for the extra 15 CP. Hell - I might even use more HP to shield to get it. Would I do that for a 4* - not in every event (yes for a selected few covers).

Would I go beyond 1000 for a reward - highly unlikely (I don't even attempt it now when the reward is at 1200 and there is nothing in between to gain but the loses of staying unshielded once you are being hit are irreplaceable). I believe you need a developed 5* roster or you need to pay real money to hit 1200 in every event (the former being often the result of the latter). I am not there and without the increase in CP flow or change in RNG-only roster progress I will not be there for a long time.

Ducky

Please keep this thread on topic. If you want to discuss PvP reward structure, take it to PMs or start a separate thread about it. Thanks!

kyo28

Getting back on topic: is there any news yet? Even if it's not a definitive answer but just a little extra info on which ideas are still bouncing around and/or which new ideas are being considered?

Pretty please?

GrumpySmurf1002

GurlBYE wrote:

As much as you guys let everyone in the forum know how unfun the game has become.

They exaggerate. My enjoyment level is exactly the same with a 453 Surfer/453 OML as it was running Jeanbuster everywhere.

GurlBYE wrote:

PVE sucks and PVP is the same team ad nausem.
You fight the same players and use the same teams for everything
maybe 5% of all rewards are actually meaningful to you.

This is all overblown too.

PvE sucks regardless of your level.
PvP is expanding by the day. As more people open their hoards, the more variety you're seeing. I fight Thanos/Bolt/Widow/Strange all the time now. Yeah OML/PHX are still around, but they're dwindling.

And most of the rewards are still quite meaningful, because championing is a thing. Yeah I could do without the dang standard tokens everywhere, but that's its own issue.

Brigby

kyo28 wrote:

Getting back on topic: is there any news yet? Even if it's not a definitive answer but just a little extra info on which ideas are still bouncing around and/or which new ideas are being considered?

Pretty please?

Yes. We've actually just announced one feature that should help: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=62612

Once it goes live, the development team will be monitoring it and evaluating its performance to see if any adjustments are necessary.

Nellobee

Someone with even cursory experience playing could tell you this is wildly inadequate.

GurlBYE

Well he did say a store was in the talks.

I think we were all hoping that they'd talk in a different direction because yikes.

I feel like even though people were upset there were tons of non store ideas pitched.

firethorne

Hmm, not even close. Well, I can say it is quite the fortuitous time for Elder Scrolls: Legends to come out.

Alsmir

Feels like a spit to the face.

Crnch73

woof. Just... woof.

what a bad idea. Could this have been any more of a sign that said "Give me your money!" ?